6

I think one of the attractions kids and teens have with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (TMNT) is that the name itself is quirky and sounds fun. Those particular words mashed together are sort of an absurdity. An adjective followed by three unlikely juxtaposed nouns -- it's just weird. But is it grammatically correct? I've always thought it to be, until last night when I happened to hear it, and it didn't sound right.

Extended noun phrases are uncommon in English. As I understand it, they are common in Finnish and German (and probably other languages as well). They even remove the spaces between the words of the phrase. In English, though, it sounds, well, "off".

I understand the fun-factor is in itself a marketing tool. Around 1990 a TMNT movie came out. To take advantage of the brand awareness, a commercial bakery began mass-producing Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Cookies. They came in a bag like Oreos. If that's okay, how far can you take it? Can one speak of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Cookies bag? And the bag has a label -- TMNT Cookies bag label??

This is a current topic. I could not find a page talking about the prepackaged, ready-to-eat TMNT cookies already discussed. But I did find this: Betty Crocker Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Shell-Shocked Sugar Cookie Mix. (I think I'll buy and make it, and save the BCTMNTSSSCM box. ) Let's see -- 8 nouns, 1 adjective, and one compound adjective. They are taking the "fun name" concept to a whole new level. But again, can that be correct?

RichF
  • 856
  • 5
    I don't think it's "[an] adjective followed by three nouns" - as I read it, the noun is turtles, and the first three words progressively modify it, so it's more like a nested noun phrase consisting of three adjectives and a noun: teenage [mutant (ninja tutles)]. – Lawrence Jan 24 '17 at 14:19
  • As for Betty Crocker ..., remember the buffalo. :) – Lawrence Jan 24 '17 at 14:24
  • Agreed. In prose rather than "branded" you would write teenage, mutant, ninja turtles – Stu W Jan 24 '17 at 14:24
  • 2
    @StuW would we? Would someone actually write, "boy band, lead singer" as opposed to "boy band lead singer"? – RichF Jan 24 '17 at 14:28
  • No. Apples and oranges. Teenage and mutant and ninja turtles vs. boy and band and lead singer, "boy band* is being used as a compound adjective and in theory could be hyphenated; "lead singer" is now used as a compound noun as a specific type of vocalist. In theory, you wouldn't use comma for {boy band, lead singer such as boy band and lead singer} – Stu W Jan 24 '17 at 14:52
  • @Stu Not apples and oranges. They are not turtles who are also ninjas, mutants, and teenagers. They are turtles of the ninja type of the mutant type of the teenage type: [teenage [mutant [ninja turtles]]]. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jan 24 '17 at 15:04
  • @Lawrence Those are all nouns used attributively, like rubber baby buggy bumpers. Using a noun attributively to modify a second noun does not make that first noun an adjective; it remains a noun. – tchrist Jan 24 '17 at 18:46
  • @StuW I chose an inadequate example. Both "lead singer" and "boy band" have specific, extremely common usages as word pairs. Essentially, hooking them together makes just an adjective followed by a noun, which would not justify a comma. My example would have been more to the point if it had been, "That glitzy kid is an Australian boy band lead singer." I agree phrasing it differently could improve parsability, though. "That glitzy kid is the lead singer of an Australian boy band." But either way, I don't think commas are necessary. – RichF Jan 24 '17 at 21:30
  • @JanusBahsJacquet thank you. You and StuW made me hungry. I had to go get some lunch. + = 2 fruit, unless we ignored the banana. – RichF Jan 24 '17 at 21:33
  • @RichF I spent a good thirty seconds there being slightly worried that Australian boy band lead singers make you hungry before I realised what you meant. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Jan 24 '17 at 21:35
  • @JanusBahsJacquet I was clarifying my comment as you added yours. BTW, you need not worry about my, um, taste in lead singers. – RichF Jan 24 '17 at 21:42
  • @tchrist Ok, point taken. In some grammars, though, isn't the function of a word the determining factor in whether it's labeled a noun or adjective? – Lawrence Jan 24 '17 at 23:29

1 Answers1

7

There are a couple of ways of analyzing the noun phrase 'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles'.

The first unsatisfying way is to claim that it is a one-time invention or idiom that was created rather desultorily, and as an invention (or idiom) it is correct by fiat. Even though it might be out of order according to conventional rules, it is grammatical because that ordering is the way it is created to be. This is unsatisfying because you are looking for a reason for that particular sequence and this justification works for anything.

The second way, which I think is closer to what you seek, is to analyze according to the rules of ordering adjectives. You can find this addressed quite well here at "What is the rule for adjective order?". To combine the slight variations there, the general rule in English is

article, number, judgement/attitude, size/length/height, age, color, origin, material, purpose, attributive-noun, target noun

All that is needed is to judge each of our modifiers to be these roles.

One may have more than one of each role and then anything goes (subject to vague 'sounds better' rules).

And there may be difficulty in assigning role.

  • 'teenage' is pretty obviously an age
  • 'mutant' is ... hm, is that an adjective or a noun? If it is an adjective it seems likely to be one of judgement (coming earlier in the order). But it feels more like a noun.
  • 'ninja' is a noun, so it acts as an attributive noun here
  • 'turtle' is the target noun

If you accept mutant as a noun then teenage comes first, then mutant and ninja could be in either order, followed by turtle. 'Teenage ninja mutant turtles', ignoring the prominence of the existing idiom, I think sounds fine. But the one we hear everyday sounds fine also.

So the end judgement is that the ordering is grammatical.

Of course, your inner assignment of roles to these words may well be different ad that may account for your questioning.

As a side note, newspaper headlines tend to convert numerous qualifiers into a pile-up of attributive nouns which tends to overwhelm our parsing mechanisms, but presumably they are parsable somehow to be considered 'correct' as in "Slough sausage choke baby death woman jailed". TMNT is just a large mouthful to swallow and because of that sounds 'off'.

Community
  • 1
Mitch
  • 71,423
  • Thank you. I find it hard to believe anyone finds that newspaper headline to be "parsable". I don't think many Americans have even heard of "slough sausage", so that doesn't help my inner parser. // I have always interpreted "mutant" to be a noun. We tend to use "mutated" to be the adjectival form (e.g. "mutated virus"). I never thought of the order "teenage ninja mutant turtles", but I agree that it would sound fine. – RichF Jan 24 '17 at 17:31
  • What's the difference between teenage and teenaged? – tchrist Jan 24 '17 at 18:47
  • I think "mutant" is an attributive noun in this context as well. No? – verbose Jan 24 '17 at 19:08
  • I know that examples of origin adjectives generally refer someplace you can point to on a map (French, northern, etc.). But if we take it in its comic book, *origin story* sense then mutant could be an adjective and belong right where it is. – 1006a Jan 24 '17 at 20:27
  • @tchrist They are equivalent, but I believe teenage is the more common form. Where would the "d" come from in converting "teenager" to an adjective? See teenaged. – RichF Jan 24 '17 at 21:16
  • @RichF 'teenaged' = 'aged as old as a teen' – Mitch Jan 24 '17 at 22:08
  • Also 'Slough' is a suburb of London so it is a proper noun and thus acts attributively there – Mitch Jan 24 '17 at 22:09